Harvard University is taking on the Trump administration in court after losing $2.5 billion in federal grants. On Monday, the prestigious Ivy League school urged a federal judge to restore the funding, which was canceled amid accusations of antisemitism.
During a two-hour hearing in Boston, Harvard’s lawyer, Steven Lehotsky, argued that the government cut off research funding without any clear connection to antisemitism. “The administration has given no consideration to patients, the public at large, and the harm of all this research being cut off,” Lehotsky told the court.
Michael Velchik, a senior lawyer for the U.S. Justice Department, defended the decision, stating, “Harvard prioritized campus protesters over cancer research.” He emphasized that the government aims not to fund institutions that practice antisemitism.
U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs expressed skepticism toward the government’s stance. “That’s a major stumbling block for me,” she said, questioning the administration’s claim that it can terminate federal grants for any policy reasons. The hearing ended without a ruling, leaving the fate of the funding uncertain.
This case highlights the escalating conflict between the White House and Harvard. Earlier this year, the university rejected demands from the administration to alter its governance, hiring, and admissions practices. President Trump has accused several U.S. universities of harboring antisemitic and “radical left” ideologies, using federal funding as leverage to force changes.
Meanwhile, trade tensions are heating up as the Trump administration imposes new tariffs. U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick announced that starting August 1, countries must begin paying reciprocal tariffs to the United States. The tariffs target key trading partners, including a 50% tariff on Brazil, 35% on Canada, and 30% on the European Union and Mexico.
Canada may soon retaliate. Prime Minister Mark Carney hinted in June that Canada would adjust steel and aluminum counter-tariffs, depending on trade negotiations with the U.S.
Consumers and businesses are feeling the impact. “Costs are increasing, especially rent,” said Jacob Dials, an Arizona resident. Cynthia Sabatini, a Republican from suburban Philadelphia, added, “Across-the-board tariffs are not a good approach.”
Public opinion reflects this dissatisfaction. An AP-NORC poll from mid-July found that only about a quarter of U.S. adults believe Trump’s policies have helped them since he took office. Approximately half say his policies have done more harm than good in the past six months.
“He’s turned us into a toilet and has absolutely made us the laughing stock of the world,” said Timothy Dwyer, a 26-year-old from Tennessee, referring to Trump’s trade policies.
The administration faces challenges in fulfilling key campaign promises, such as reducing costs for working-class Americans and lowering government spending. Inflation rose last month to its highest level since February. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that 11.8 million more Americans are now uninsured, and the national debt has increased by $3.3 trillion.
Additionally, a New York Federal Reserve survey reported that over 40% of businesses relying on imported goods have experienced a decrease in net incomes.
As tensions escalate both domestically and internationally, the outcomes of these policies remain uncertain, leaving many questioning what the future holds.
